Re: [PATCH] Add missing includes to headers

On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 15:24:57 -0500 Peter Foley wrote:

On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 3:03 PM Stefano Brivio wrote:

...

Ugh. Yet another alternative could be to enable misc-include-cleaner for headers only, which would probably need a separate invocation of clang-tidy.

I'm not sure if that will work at all though. If it doesn't, I'm out of ideas... maybe we should simply go back to your original patch, in that case, and you'll just get to "fix" things as they break (hopefully infrequently) in the future.

I tried that, it didn't go well either: /usr/local/google/home/pefoley/passt/util.h:140:5: error: no header providing "__BYTE_ORDER" is directly included [misc-include-cleaner,-warnings-as-errors]

9 | #if __BYTE_ORDER == __BIG_ENDIAN

| ^

/usr/local/google/home/pefoley/passt/util.h:140:21: error: no header providing "__BIG_ENDIAN" is directly included [misc-include-cleaner,-warnings-as-errors]

140 | #if __BYTE_ORDER == __BIG_ENDIAN

| ^

/usr/local/google/home/pefoley/passt/util.h:241:42: error: no header providing "iovec" is directly included [misc-include-cleaner,-warnings-as-errors]

9 | int write_remainder(int fd, const struct iovec *iov, size_t iovcnt, size_t skip); | ^

/usr/local/google/home/pefoley/passt/util.h:254:35: error: no header providing "sa_family_t" is directly included [misc-include-cleaner,-warnings-as-errors]

9 | static inline const char *af_name(sa_family_t af)

Oh... fun.

I'm inclined to forget about trying to fix everything and just do the minimal set of changes to make the tooling happy with parsing the headers.

Yeah, at this point I'd totally support that. -- Stefano